Buckeyeskickbuttocks;1563655; said:
Sorry, I was too busy bronzing the HOF statues for Wisconsin's lineman, because you know they're so good...what was that?
Upvote
0
-
Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
- Thread starter BB73
- Start date
- Status
Sorry, I was too busy bronzing the HOF statues for Wisconsin's lineman, because you know they're so good...what was that?
Ohio State: 1.29 plays for each point
Wisconsin: 6.89 plays for each point
Granted, the plays per point here is skewed for Ohio State, but it's remarkable nonetheless.
Wisconsin: 6.89 plays for each point
Granted, the plays per point here is skewed for Ohio State, but it's remarkable nonetheless.
Upvote
0
Bucklion;1563666; said:
Unfortunately the statues were destroyed by the caustic dripping sarcasm.
Upvote
0
Man...like...Wisky's Oline was just outclassed. I didn't expect that level of dominance. Clay held to like 2 yards a carry.
Funny thing was, the DLine wasn't even trying any moves, it was all just off of bull rushes...
Funny thing was, the DLine wasn't even trying any moves, it was all just off of bull rushes...
Upvote
0
rharley34
Harley In The Huddle
Bucklion;1563613; said:
That says nothing about comparing Clay to OSU's RBs, OSU's RBs didn't have to go up against the best defense in the country like John Clay did. Furthermore no one said that Wisconsin's O-line would dominate OSU's defense. I was comparing O-line to O-line, and I can sure tell you one thing OSU's O-line didn't do anything to win that battle. If you're going to debate, at least do it logically
Upvote
0
Or you could just admit they didn't play as well as you expected. Many people expected Wisconsin to be able to pound it to some degree, so you weren't alone there in your praise for that unit.
I know I expected Wisconsin's defense to have more trouble stopping OSU than they did. I figured they'd give up 175 rush 150 passing. Now, the 3rd quarter distorted the results quite a bit, with the game being over before they got the ball again... but still, I was wrong in those expectations.
I know I expected Wisconsin's defense to have more trouble stopping OSU than they did. I figured they'd give up 175 rush 150 passing. Now, the 3rd quarter distorted the results quite a bit, with the game being over before they got the ball again... but still, I was wrong in those expectations.
No, but they did a whole lot less to lose it... Wisky's tackles were turnstiles, holding on for dear life as they breezed by. Tolzien did a good job avoiding some of the pressure, or the damage would have been even worse.
Upvote
0
rharley34
Harley In The Huddle
I know I expected Clay to get the rock more than 20 times, but I stated on our pregame that this Buckeye defense is the best in the country. I wasn't expecting Wisconsin to do too much on offense. Once again comparing how Wisconsin's O played to how OSU's O played is apples to oranges. Wisconsin's defense isn't even half as good as OSU's. And stating that UW gets the edge in RB and in O-line is in no way predicting them to pound OSU's defense, it's only a comparison of similar units.
And obviously no one could predict the turnovers going for TDs and then a KO return on top of that. Other than one drive OSU's offense was brutal as usual, regardless of sitting for most of the game this offense is not ready to play any premier teams. November will be ugly for this offense, it's a good thing the silver bullets are back.
And obviously no one could predict the turnovers going for TDs and then a KO return on top of that. Other than one drive OSU's offense was brutal as usual, regardless of sitting for most of the game this offense is not ready to play any premier teams. November will be ugly for this offense, it's a good thing the silver bullets are back.
Upvote
0
4 receptions for 35 yards, 2 holds, 1 false start ... what an asset!rharley34;1561071; said:
rharley34;1561055; said:
OregonBuckeye;1561069; said:
You mean playmakers like Kurt Coleman and Jermale Hines...?rharley34;1561074; said:
And this week you can say that they've given up only 8 sacks ALL season!rharley34;1561055; said:
Just my inexperienced and unprofessional opinions, of course....
Upvote
0
rharley34
Harley In The Huddle
LordJeffBuck;1565716; said:
Once again, not sure what anyone's argument is on here...
Your inexperience is showing...
I was previewing the game and highlighting some of Wisconsin's strengths, and then you're throwing stats out AFTER the game as if everyone knew there would be 6 sacks and 2 picks to the house.
4 catches for 35yds doesn't make Graham any less of an asset to a new QB, it just means OSU shut him down. In fact all these stats don't make any of Wisconsin's players (RB or O-line) any less talented, they only highlight just how good the Silver Bullets are. Being worried about a certain aspect of a team doesn't mean I think they'll be successful, but that's how we as players/coaches think...always prepare for a team's strengths
Upvote
0
rharley34;1565758; said:
Face it, you came on here and talked up Wisconsin's line like they were the 72 Dolphins and...they got beat like a rented mule for large portions of the game. Then, what, I guess 20 carries wasn't enough for Clay to prove you right I guess, huh? I mean yeah, a back can't possibly establish himself without, what, 30 carries? 40? I saw one back get a 30 yard run, and it wasn't Clay. I saw one offensive line give up 6 sacks, and it wasn't ours. You acted like we were a bunch of amateur homers for not giving Wisconsin anywhere near enough credit on offense (starting by commenting without even reading the preview right), and then you feel the need to come back and act like you were right anyway, no matter how the game turned out.
In fact, with this statement "I was previewing the game and highlighting some of Wisconsin's strengths, and then you're throwing stats out AFTER the game as if everyone knew there would be 6 sacks and 2 picks to the house." you act like it doesn't even matter how the game turned out, which I guess means you're always right no matter what you say, right? Uh, Yeah, OK. Actually some of us watched Wisconsin's earlier games and weren't all that impressed, unlike you. Some of us did predict Wisconsin's offense not playing that well against a solid team, unlike you. Some of us saw holes in Wisconsin's offensive line, especially on the right side, unlike you. And some of us saw Clay could dominate a weak defense but could struggle against a good front 7, making him a reasonably good but unspectacular back at this stage, unlike you.
Where was that inexperience showing again exactly?
Last edited:
Upvote
0
But, the previews aren't written for that. We're not here to hype whatever we think might be the best aspect of a team Ohio State is playing and we're not "preparing" to take their best shot because we're not in the locker room either. We're fans, on a fan site, writing previews.
I like to think our previews are fair. Do we miss the mark on some things? Of course. But, our previews are not written to generate ANY pregame hype and if the preview team thinks the O-Line is overrated, then the team says so, even when that team has given up 2 sacks all year to that point. If we were on ESPN, we'd probably focus only on the positive and talk up the O-Line, for example, as the strongest unit in the bunch, bla bla bla. But, as it is, the author of that section saw a weakness and didn't try to over look it with niceties about how they gave up just two sacks to the sisters of the poor.
Like I said a couple of pages ago, Rob I think your opinion was certainly supported and informed, and you're also welcome to argue your positions, and I think you did that. But, you should also bear in mind, we're not interested in regurgitating what you might hear on College Gameday. I'm not suggesting that's all you've done, just that .... maybe I'm not articulating myself well... These previews aren't written with the objective of selling ads, or putting butts in seats, or for the authors to make any money, or anything else. They're written so our user base can get an idea of what the Buckeyes are facing come Saturday, no bullshit. Like I said, do we get some stuff wrong? Yeah.. we are, after all, making livings doing other things than writting about football.. But, we get some stuff right too. As it happens, one of the things we got right was the O-Line preview.
I like to think our previews are fair. Do we miss the mark on some things? Of course. But, our previews are not written to generate ANY pregame hype and if the preview team thinks the O-Line is overrated, then the team says so, even when that team has given up 2 sacks all year to that point. If we were on ESPN, we'd probably focus only on the positive and talk up the O-Line, for example, as the strongest unit in the bunch, bla bla bla. But, as it is, the author of that section saw a weakness and didn't try to over look it with niceties about how they gave up just two sacks to the sisters of the poor.
Like I said a couple of pages ago, Rob I think your opinion was certainly supported and informed, and you're also welcome to argue your positions, and I think you did that. But, you should also bear in mind, we're not interested in regurgitating what you might hear on College Gameday. I'm not suggesting that's all you've done, just that .... maybe I'm not articulating myself well... These previews aren't written with the objective of selling ads, or putting butts in seats, or for the authors to make any money, or anything else. They're written so our user base can get an idea of what the Buckeyes are facing come Saturday, no bullshit. Like I said, do we get some stuff wrong? Yeah.. we are, after all, making livings doing other things than writting about football.. But, we get some stuff right too. As it happens, one of the things we got right was the O-Line preview.
Upvote
0
Yes, it's called being wrong. It happens, and it goes over a lot better when excuses aren't made afterwards.
It means they didn't really have their hands full, they were more than ready for the challenge.
So when OSU abuses UW's OL, it doesn't dispute your prediction (it's just a testament to the opposition)... but when OSU's OL struggles, it proves your point. Convenient.
Well that doesn't leave much wiggle room, no matter what stats are logged after this post. I'm not interested in taking cover for the falling sky for two months. I might wait and see if the inconsistent storm subsides as Pryor matures.
And we don't generally follow up those misses with excuses.bkb said:
Upvote
0
jwinslow;1565819; said:
Yes, and in fact I'm willing to come out right now and say if anything was wrong about the offense this week it was the QB position. Given the fact he had little help from his offensive line or his power running game, Tolzien hung tough and played pretty well. Pryor, other than a couple of runs and one short drive at the end of the half, didn't. I'm not going to whine and cry about it. I'm not going to say Pryor beat himself, or "could have" made more plays than Tolzien did, therefore we were right because, well, we always are no matter what, you know, happened in the game...that one didn't turn out in Pryor's favor this week. The running game and the offensive line, however, didn't give Wisconsin much, now did it?
Last edited by a moderator:
Upvote
0
Hmmm, I thought that the whole idea of making a preview was to accurately predict the outcome of the game. I guess that's just my inexperience showing again. But actually, I like your world view better - using it, I can make any prediction whatsoever, and when it doesn't come to fruition, I can simply blame the actual outcome for ruining my perfect hypothetical. That's a whole lot easier than admitting that said hypothetical was flawed to begin with ... but maybe part of being an experienced professional analyst is never having to admit that you were wrong.rharley34;1565758; said:
Which "strengths" of Wisconsin will you be highlighting this week? Tolzien's brilliant game management? The unstoppable John Clay? The overpowering play of the OL? The TE's ability to move the chains on third down? Just curious....
Upvote
0
rharley34
Harley In The Huddle
The inexperience comes in because I never once predicted what would happen in the game, so there is no right or wrong. Fans can't see it for what it really is, you guys pick based on passion not actual experience tackling a 250lb RB or going against a solid TE. I can't say it enough, giving "edges" in games isn't to say one TEAM is better than another and it's not predicting the outcome. It's only saying that going into a certain game, based on production, one unit is more solid than another. I sit in meetings with these OSU players, and I watch their practice film. OSU's O-line won't have the "edge" in any game in November, but that is in no way saying that they can't put a great game together. All these sites are the same, former players give their insights or opinions and then they're blasted for being self righteous and arrogant. God forbid someone who has experience breaking down game film has a different opinion. It's also obvious that none of you watched our show on saturday where I stated that OSU had the best defense in the country and that they'd WIN the game. I can't make any excuses because I never predicted anything, I just stated who I thought had the edge and then gave my reasoning (2 sacks). Nothing more, nothing less.
Last edited by a moderator:
Upvote
0
- Status